Lord Rooker: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Peter Hain) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	Later today I will be introducing a Northern Ireland (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill which will, amongst other things, pave the way for future devolution of policing and justice in Northern Ireland. I am introducing this enabling legislation now because I want to send out a clear message: I believe that responsibility for policing and justice in Northern Ireland should properly lie with a Northern Ireland Assembly, directly accountable to the people of Northern Ireland.
	Devolution of policing and justice cannot happen until the Assembly is restored and requests devolution of these functions, and until Parliament agrees it. But although this may be some way off, it is important that we start discussing now, with all the parties, how devolution of policing and justice can work most effectively for the people of Northern Ireland.
	We need to ensure that we are agreed on the model for the new department or departments. We need to develop a shared understanding of exactly what will be devolved and how it will operate. And we need to make sure that a future Northern Ireland Assembly has the tools they need to deliver policing and justice effectively, for example giving the Assembly the power to raise revenue for policing from a policing precept, as is the case in England, Scotland and Wales.
	The discussion paper is intended to initiate and facilitate those discussions. It sets out what the Government believes is a sensible and pragmatic framework for policing and justice in Northern Ireland under an Assembly. It sets out which specific powers we think should be devolved and how these could operate. It also identifies particular areas where further thinking is needed.
	The paper is not a blueprint but a discussion document. It is an opportunity for all those with an interest, but particularly the political parties in Northern Ireland, to engage with the Government and, together, work out how devolution of policing and justice should work.
	The Bill contains a number of provisions in addition to those providing for future devolution of policing and justice, including provisions relating to elections in Northern Ireland, a power to create a wholesale electricity market for the island of Ireland and provision to facilitate the funding of sustainable energy development in Northern Ireland.
	The various policies in the Bill have been equality screened to assess whether they impact adversely on any of the nine equality groups in Northern Ireland. The assessment is that no such adverse impact arises. Steps are being taken to draw the Bill and the discussion paper to the attention of representative groups.
	I am placing in the Libraries copies of the regulatory impact assessment prepared in relation to the single wholesale electricity provisions in the Bill, and of the discussion paper.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Andy Burnham) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today placing in the Libraries of both Houses recently issued guidance from the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to chief officers on the consideration of applications for the removal, in exceptional circumstances only, of DNA and fingerprints from the respective databases. There has been considerable recent interest in the policy and operation of the National DNA Database (NDNAD), particularly in relation to juveniles and those arrested but subsequently not proceeded against. This statement and accompanying guidance is intended to inform that debate.
	Under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, (PACE) as amended, the police may take without consent a non-intimate DNA sample and fingerprints from all persons arrested for, informed they will be reported for, or charged with a recordable offence and detained in a police station. Since May 2001, the police have been able to retain the DNA samples and fingerprints taken from persons who have not been convicted of such an offence. That change in legislation was itself challenged by judicial review and in July 2004 a judicial committee of the House of Lords found that the retention of DNA samples and fingerprints in these circumstances was proportionate and justified. The police may also take and retain DNA and fingerprints from persons convicted of a recordable offence. The amendment to PACE to allow the police to take and retain DNA and fingerprints from arrested persons is contained in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 which was considered carefully by Parliament.
	Since the amendment to PACE in 2001, about 200,000 DNA samples have been retained that would previously have had to be destroyed and of these, over 8,000 have been matched with crime scene stains involving nearly 14,000 offences, including murder, rape and other sexual offences. Early research has also shown that sampling persons who have been arrested but not proceeded against has yielded a "match" with a crime scene stain in over 3,000 offences, again including murder, manslaughter and rape. These links may never have been made had the police not been given their current powers to take and retain DNA. In relation to the 24,168 under-18s who have been arrested but not charged, which include 23 arrests for murder and 288 for rape, 541 have been matched to crime scenes profiles for unsolved crimes.
	I wish to draw Members' attention to two important points in relation to juveniles under 10. Firstly, there are no under-10s on the NDNAD where the sample has been taken without the consent of a parent or legal guardian, and in fact there are no powers to do so without such consent. Secondly, it is possible for anyone to apply to their chief constable to have their or their child's DNA or fingerprints removed from the databases and the ACPO guidance sets out the process for doing that.
	Tony Lake, chief constable of Lincolnshire Police Force and chairman of the National DNA Database Strategy Board has emphasised the value of DNA evidence and the importance of the database to the criminal justice service.
	New governance arrangements for the NDNAD were introduced in December 2005 following the transformation of the Forensic Science Service to a government-owned company. A new delivery unit, which will initially be part of the Home Office, is responsible for the standard setting and oversight of the NDNAD, ensuring quality and integrity of the service. It will be overseen by the National DNA Database Strategic Board, a tripartite board composed of representatives from the Home Office, ACPO and the Association of Police Authorities. Representation at meetings of the board by the Human Genetics Commission is being increased from one to two persons in order to strengthen lay representation and the Government are additionally looking to establish a dedicated ethics group to provide independent oversight of board decision-making.
	Inclusion on the NDNAD does not signify a criminal record and there is no personal cost or material disadvantage to the individual simply by being on it. Given this, and the clear evidence showing the substantial public benefit in relation to the detection of serious crime, it is the judgment of the Government that the existing policy is justified. However, they accept the need for ongoing accountability to the public and the NDNAD annual report, which publishes details of its activities and will be laid before Parliament, is an important part of the aim to increase transparency and maintain and improve public confidence in the oversight, management and operations of the NDNAD.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Paul Goggins) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	On 12 January, I announced that the Government had decided to introduce an approved contractor scheme (ACS) for the private security industry and that the detail of the scheme, including the fee structure, would be announced at a later date. The purpose of the scheme is to protect the public and to maintain and improve standards within the private security industry.
	The detail of the ACS has now been decided. It will have the following key features.
	The scheme will have three broad alternative routes to accreditation, relating to a combination of options 3 and 4 set out in the draft regulatory impact assessment (RIA) issued on 25 August 2005:
	(a) self-assessment against a Security Industry Authority (SIA)-provided workbook followed by verification from an SIA-approved assessing body;
	(b) confirmation of ISO9001:2000 certification by a UKAS-accredited body combined with British Standards compliance, topped up with those elements of the SIA self-assessment workbook in (a) not already covered; and
	(c) use of an existing SIA-approved accreditation, based on existing standards, to meet the same requirement as (a).
	Companies approved under the scheme will be permitted to deploy up to 15 per cent of their security personnel who are not yet licensed but who have completed training and have an application pending. I have already announced that they will not be able to deploy unlicensed personnel on assignments that involve contact with children or vulnerable adults. This will ensure that those dealing with this particularly sensitive group have undergone, and satisfied any SIA requirements relating to, a Criminal Records Bureau check.
	The fee structure has been set, following consultation on a partial regulatory impact assessment, to enable full cost recovery for each type of firm, and is in two parts:
	the application fee, to cover the pre-approval costs of considering applications for approval; and
	the annual registration fee, to cover the post-approval costs of ensuring that standards are maintained by all employees covered by the scheme.
	
		
			 Type of Firm Employees ApplicationFees Annual Registration Fee 
			 Micro under 10 £400 ) 
			 Small 10 to 25 £800 )£20 per licensable employee 
			 Medium 26 to 250 £1,600 ) 
			 Large over 250 £2,400 ) 
		
	
	The application fees are slightly lower than those consulted upon in the partial RIA.
	The detail of the ACS will be subject to annual review.
	Regulations will be made to bring the ACS into force from 20 March 2006. A full regulatory impact assessment will be published on the same date.
	Full details of the scheme, including the workbook, are on the SIA website at www.the-sia.org.uk.

Lord Davies of Oldham: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Derek Twigg) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	Today the Department for Transport has published the first of its series of regional planning assessments for the railway (RPAs). This is the eastern RPA, covering north and east London and the east of England region.
	Regional planning assessments are designed to inform the development of the Government's strategy for the railway. They look at the challenges and options for development of the railway in each region over the next 20 years, in the wider context of forecast change in population, the economy and travel behaviour. An RPA does not commit the Government to specific proposals. Instead, it sets out the Government's current thinking on how the railway might best be developed to allow wider planning objectives for a region to be met, and identifies the priorities for further development work.
	RPAs are the key link between regional spatial planning (including preparation of regional transport strategies) and planning for the railway by both Government and the rail industry. There will be 11 RPAs covering England and Wales.
	The RPA clarifies the role of the railway in the region, its contribution to the economy and its place in the overall transport system, setting out where greater rail capability and capacity will be needed over the next 20 years, and the options route by route for responding to that need. In the shorter term (five years), the Government are committed to making the best use of existing capacity on the network by matching resources to demand.
	Copies of the eastern RPA have been placed in the House Library today.

Lord Davies of Oldham: My honourable friend the Minister for Transport (Dr Stephen Ladyman) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	I am today launching a full public consultation on the release of data from the DVLA and DVLNI vehicle registers. I have placed copies in the House Library and it is also available on the DfT web site at www.dft.gov.uk.
	The Government take very seriously their responsibilities for protecting individuals' legitimate expectations of privacy and confidentiality. Information collected from citizens is therefore held securely and will be released to third parties only where there is a lawful basis for doing so. There is a broad consensus that some groups—such as the police—should have full access to details from the vehicle register. Over the past 40 years, a wide range of other groups have been granted access to details held on the register for what is judged to be "reasonable cause". However, the activities of a small number of groups that have been granted access has raised significant concern. And so we are today setting out how the current system operates, and the main options for the future. Consultation will last six weeks and we look forward to receiving responses by 31 March.
	Specifically, the consultation seeks views on the groups that should have information from the vehicle register and the reasons for their having it; how we manage access to the register; and the audit regime for those who are granted access.
	Following the consultation, we will announce any changes that are to be made and, if necessary, amend legislation accordingly. We intend to ensure that this current review produces a system that protects vehicle keepers from misuse of their information; ensures that those who do have a good case can get the data they need; balances the right to privacy of individuals whose data are held on the register with the rights of others to gain proper redress; is cost effective, in that the costs to all are proportionate to the benefits that the scheme delivers; and is right in principle and works in practice.